Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: thomas.br...@virtuell-zuhause.de
I have a "Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3930K CPU @ 3.20GH" CPU and I'm on debian
unstable.
The bottom line is that gcc-4.8 reports incorrect cache sizes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58091
Thomas Braun changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||thomas.braun@virtuell-zuhau
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: thomas.br...@virtuell-zuhause.de
The following code is rejected by
~/gcc-4.8.2/bin/g++ -std=c++11 test.cpp
#include
struct A
{
static constexpr auto b{1.0};
};
constexpr
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: thomas.br...@virtuell-zuhause.de
Compiling
#
struct B {
B(int, double) {}
};
void g(B) {};
int main(int argc, char** argv)
{
g( {'a', 'b'} ); // OK: g(B(int,d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53637
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Braun ---
(I'm no gcc dev at all)
In general gcc is much better in doing NRVO/URVO than other compilers according
to my analysis [1]. So maybe the competitors need to get better first ;)
[1]: http://www.byte-physics.d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53637
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Braun ---
> The three cases (L, P, R) where GCC is "better" is actually non-conforming.
Could you elaborate on that?
For example case L is:
X nrvo_two_different_tern()
{
trace t("nrvo_two_different_tern");
const
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: thomas.br...@virtuell-zuhause.de
Target Milestone: ---
GCC told me to come here.
$/rest/inst/gcc-6.1.0/usr/local/bin/gcc --help=^
cc1: internal compiler error: Speicherzugriffsfehler
0x9c70ff crash_signal
